Mr FITZGIBBON(5.35 p.m.) —I want to use the limited time available to me in the grievance debate to highlight the result of many of the decisions taken in the first three months of this government and those that are likely to be announced in the August budget. Many of these decisions are having very adverse effects on people in rural Australia. The latest decision, which was made only last Thursday, was to revoke exceptional circumstances criteria for many rural areas in Australia, including areas in my own electorate such as Scone, Denman and Singleton. This decision will have a devastating effect on my electorate.

Many members will be aware that my father was the member for Hunter up until March this year. I have to say that 1995 was a difficult year for the former member. Notwithstanding the obvious effects of drought in many areas of the Upper Hunter, RASAC, the body charged with making recommendations to the minister regarding the designation of exceptional circumstances areas, continued to deny many areas of my electorate drought assistance. I understand that RASAC considers meteorological, agronomic, economic and environmental conditions when assessing an area.

Finally, and thankfully, by the end of last year most areas in my electorate were granted exceptional circumstances classification. The former member suffered a great deal of criticism between the period when classifications first began to be handed out and when his electorate received assistance. The plight of the farmers was obvious, but the best the former member could do was turn to the recommendations of RASAC, the technical body.

The real pain came from the cries of the then opposition members in the Hunter and nearby. One of those screaming at that time is now the minister responsible! What has the minister, the member for Gwydir (Mr Anderson), now done? After months and months of pain and suffering and continual fighting to have those areas designated so that people in the Upper Hunter can receive drought relief assistance, the minister has now revoked the classification. Why? On the advice of RASAC.

Before I say another word, I want to assure the House that the Upper Hunter is still very much in drought. I will not ask honourable members to take my word; rather, I will quote from the front page of an Upper Hunter newspaper, dated 3 June 1996:

Almost all of the Upper Hunter remains drought declared as farmers start to prepare for the added burden of winter and its usual slow growth conditions. The entire Scone and Merriwa rural lands protection districts had been included on the drought declaration list for June. Parts of the Denman and Singleton rural lands protection district are also on the drought list.

The Merriwa rural lands protection board protection spokesman, Kevin O'Malley, said that the start of winter frosts already was short-circuiting any benefit last month's rain might have had on encouraging pasture growth in his area. He said:

We have a very short green tinge in the paddocks and people are continuing to hand feed and supplementary feed.

The situation, according to the paper, is similar to that in the Singleton-Denman area, where farmers are facing the problem of not only not having the money to buy grain to feed their cattle but also not wanting to sell them in a market which is so depressed. In the Scone rural lands protection board area, veterinarian John Entwistle tells us that the drought is still having a very strong effect. Let me share with the House what the member for Gwydir had to say on 29 March last year:

My heart really goes out to those people in central New South Wales in areas such as Dubbo; Wellington and Mudgee, in my own electorate; Merriwa in the electorate of Hunter . . . and further down to Scone, where horrendous financial and personal problems are arising out of the drought. They are ruled ineligible because of a rigid set of rules, a narrow set of criteria. What is at fault? It can only be the criteria. Why is there not a willingness to do that which, as I have said, I am sure the Australian people not only expect will be done but no doubt believe is being done to meet those welfare and educational needs of those families in real crisis?

Now it seems that the recommendations of RASAC are sacrosanct. In June 1995 Senator John Tierney moved a private member's motion in the Senate on drought relief. It states:

That the Senate—

(a) condemns the Minister for Primary Industries and Energy (Senator Bob Collins) for his `boneheaded' decision to accept the recommendations of the Rural Adjustment Scheme Advisory Committee, which has continued to exclude partial areas of the Upper Hunter region from the exceptional circumstances drought aid package.

. . . . . . . . .

(c) highlights the anger of the entire Upper Hunter region at this arbitrary decision which has produced two classes of drought-ravaged farm families with the anomaly that the excluded areas are as badly drought-affected as the areas included on the list.

. . . . . . . . .

(e) demands that the Minister explain forthwith to the Senate why this unbelievable bureaucratic anomaly has occurred, placing incredible stresses and anxiety on farmers whose last hopes rested with inclusion in the exceptional circumstances list.

This is absolutely extraordinary stuff. This is the ultimate in hypocrisy coming from members on the other side. Senator Sandy Macdonald, speaking again on RASAC on 29 November 1995, said:

I am concerned by the secrecy surrounding RASAC's advice to the government. I believe the information upon which the minister bases his submissions to the cabinet must be made public to allow the more intense scrutiny that is essential. We have been told that, in formulating advice, RASAC—

and he goes through all the criteria used. He continues:

My concern lies in the interpretation of the advice by the government. After all, they are the government. They are there to provide help. Help must be provided by them.

Where is the member for Gwydir? Where is Senator Tierney? Where is Senator Sandy Macdonald now? Their silence is deafening.

The decision to revoke exceptional circumstances criteria will be devastating for people in the Upper Hunter. Honourable members of the National Party know it, yet they say nothing about it. But, worse than that, not only have they been silent when requesting further information about how RASAC comes to make its decisions but also I understand that the process adopted this time around has been less than satisfactory.

Originally, the rural lands protection boards in the Upper Hunter were invited to make submissions to RASAC, but not this time. This time, the Upper Hunter delegates were invited to places as far away as Tamworth and Coonabarabran to state their cases. They were given very short notice.

Senator Tierney, in his speech of 29 March 1995, gives examples of those who will be adversely affected by the denial by RASAC, and by implication the former government, of exceptional circumstances criteria. Before the drought a beef farmer had nil debt. But, because of the denial of government assistance and the drought, he is now $150,000 in debt.

Senator Tierney wants to suggest now, I assume—just 12 months later and with beef prices so depressed—that this gentleman no longer needs assistance. I suspect that the invitation to the National Party to become a partner in government was a token gesture only. I can only assume that to be the case, because it is obvious to me and it must be obvious to all members of this House that the voice of the National Party is not being heard in cabinet. The National Party members can do one of two things: they can start to stand up for rural and regional Australia and represent the people they purport naturally to represent or they can do the honourable thing and get out of government entirely. (Time expired)